Quote from: buwaytress on June 18, 2018, 08:13:16 AM

Quote from: BitCryptex on June 17, 2018, 04:20:06 PM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on June 17, 2018, 03:53:15 PM

Running nodes isn't free, so i think fees in LN is totally acceptable. But IMO, there should be soft-limit such as less than 1% of transacted amount/less than 100 satoshi and default fees should be set to 0.

Some wallets, for example, Eclair for Android allow you to automatically block your payment if the fee exceeds 3% of the amount you want to pay. It is quite useful but it usually warned me when I was trying to send less than 1 cent worth of Bitcoin (testing Yalls.org). I had to turn it off in the settings in order to send the payment successfully. I wouldn't have such problem if I had opened a channel directly to Yalls. Wallets should be the ones to limit the fee, not the protocol.

Running nodes have never been free, and I'm sure the hundreds of volunteer nodes securing Bitcoin (and hundreds of others securing other alternative blockchains) know this - but incentive mechanisms are already in place... I'm also quite against protocol limiting the fee (yeah, default should be zero), when that function can easily be integrated into wallets. Then again, nature of competition and business efficiency should play all this out naturally. As will the price of Bitcoin, at some point.

Usually competition works to prevent high fees, except when all route available have high fees which sucks. This will be rare case, but i'm sure this might happen when there aren't many routes and all available nodes offer high fees.
I don't like limiting the fees from protocol either, but IMO this might be necessary.